create_referral

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses a key behavioral consequence (both parties get +500 free API calls). However, it doesn't mention any limits, idempotency, or what happens if a referral code already exists. This is adequate for a simple create action but lacks deeper safety or side-effect context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, direct sentence that immediately states the action and the incentive. No filler or redundant content. It earns its place and is front-loaded with the primary purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is simple (1 parameter, no output schema), and the description captures the essential outcome. It doesn't explain return values, but with no output schema that is less critical. The incentive and action are clear, making it sufficiently complete for the task.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema covers 100% of the single parameter 'api_key' with its description. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, matching the baseline for high schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Create a referral code') and the resource (referral code). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'redeem_referral' by focusing on creation. The added incentive details ('+500 free API calls') provide context without ambiguity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage: call this when you want to create a referral code. While it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, the context is clear and naturally distinguishes from 'redeem_referral'. No explicit 'when not to use' is given, but the simple operation doesn't require it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.